Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 12 Oct 2001 22:16:05 +0200
From:      "Roger 'Rocky' Vetterberg" <rocky@ljusdal.net>
To:        Kenneth Wayne Culver <culverk@wam.umd.edu>
Cc:        freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: IPFW or IPFILTER?
Message-ID:  <3BC74F85.F480D241@ljusdal.net>
References:  <Pine.GSO.4.21.0110121221030.27531-100000@sun10pg2.wam.umd.edu>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is odd.
I have personally witnessed at least 10-12 Quake 3 players behind a single ip
handled by a IPFW/NATD machine, all on the same game server and with acceptable
ping considered the bandwidth available.
I dont recall the exact configuration of the IPFW/NATD machine, but Im quite
certian it was no higher than PII 233 with 64M, probably a lot weaker.

Im not saying ipfw is better, or worse for that matter, then ipfilter, Im just
telling you what I know.

__
R

Kenneth Wayne Culver wrote:

> Truthfully, A lot more people are starting to prefer ipfilter for nat
> solutions though, I have found that ipfilter is really easy to configure
> and get working in an acceptable manner. I've heard that if you want to
> traffic shaping but still want to use ipfilter this is possible by just
> setting the ipfw to be open by default, and use ipfilter to do the actual
> filtering; while using dummynet for traffic shaping. I'm not sure how this
> effects performance though. For NAT I would think that ipfilter is faster
> because for natd, every packet must be copied out of the kernel, to natd,
> then back into the kernel. I have actually run into problems with this
> with as few as 5 people (using Quake III on their computers connecting to
> a single Quake III server, natd handled 3 people, but when the 4th person
> connected, the ping skyrocketed, and we started having packetloss) but
> with ipfilter, the problems disappeared. This of course was on a 200MHz
> pentium pro, but it worked fine with ipfilter.
>
> Ken
>


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3BC74F85.F480D241>